Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Working conditions and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta-analysis

Mozurkewich, E·2000·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between working conditions and adverse pregnancy outcomes by performing a meta-analysis of published studies. DATA SOURCES: We searched the English-language literature in MEDLINE through August 1999 using the terms standing, posture, work, workload, working conditions, shift, occupational exposure, occupational diseases, lifting, pregnancy complications, pregnancy, small for gestational age (SGA), fetal growth retardation (FGR), preterm, and labor. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included observational studies evaluating the effect of one or more of the following work-related exposures on adverse pregnancy outcome: physically demanding work, prolonged standing, long work hours, shift work, and cumulative work fatigue score. Outcomes of interest were preterm birth, hypertension or preeclampsia, and SGA.We conducted a meta-analysis based on 160,988 women in 29 studies to evaluate the association of physically demanding work, prolonged standing, long working hours, shift work, and cumulative work fatigue score with preterm birth. Also analyzed were the associations of physically demanding work with hypertension or preeclampsia and SGA infants. The data were analyzed using the Peto-modified Mantel-Haenszel method to estimate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Physically demanding work was significantly associated with preterm birth (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.16, 1. 29), SGA (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.30, 1.44), and hypertension or preeclampsia (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.30, 1.96). Other occupational exposures significantly associated with preterm birth included prolonged standing (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13, 1.40), shift and night work (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.06, 1.46), and high cumulative work fatigue score (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.33, 1.98). We found no significant association between long work hours and preterm birth (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92, 1.16). CONCLUSION: Physically demanding work may significantly increase a woman's risk of adverse pregnancy outcome.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00598-0

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 61 references

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Mozurkewich, E.
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2000-04
Volume
95
Issue
4
Pages
623-635
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066870200
Cited by
391
References
61
FWCI
36.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Working conditions and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00598-0
The paper
Mozurkewich, E. (2000). Working conditions and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00598-0

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.